<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_28_1510200</id>
	<title>Asterisk Vishing Attacks "Endemic"</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256744400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Ian Lamont writes <i>"Remember the report last year that <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/story/08/12/06/1914242/FBI-Vaguely-Warns-of-Asterisk-Vishing-Vulnerability">the FBI was concerned</a> about a 'vishing' exploit relating to the Asterisk IP PBX software? Digium played down the report, noting that it was <a href="http://blogs.digium.com/2008/12/06/sip-security-and-asterisk/">based on a bug</a> that had already been patched, but now the company's open-source community director <a href="http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/10/27/internet-phone-systems-become-fraudsters-tool">says that attacks on Asterisk installations are 'endemic.'</a> There have been dozens of <a href="http://blogs.computerworld.com/you\_may\_not\_know\_vishing\_but\_in\_some\_cases\_the\_ftc\_has\_your\_back">reported vishing attacks</a> in recent weeks, says the article: 'The victims typically bank with smaller regional institutions, which typically have fewer resources to detect scams. Scammers hack into phone systems and then call victims, playing prerecorded messages that say there has been a billing error or warn them that the bank account has been suspended because of suspicious activity. If the worried customer enters his account number and ATM password, the bad guys use that information to make fake debit cards and empty their victim's bank accounts.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ian Lamont writes " Remember the report last year that the FBI was concerned about a 'vishing ' exploit relating to the Asterisk IP PBX software ?
Digium played down the report , noting that it was based on a bug that had already been patched , but now the company 's open-source community director says that attacks on Asterisk installations are 'endemic .
' There have been dozens of reported vishing attacks in recent weeks , says the article : 'The victims typically bank with smaller regional institutions , which typically have fewer resources to detect scams .
Scammers hack into phone systems and then call victims , playing prerecorded messages that say there has been a billing error or warn them that the bank account has been suspended because of suspicious activity .
If the worried customer enters his account number and ATM password , the bad guys use that information to make fake debit cards and empty their victim 's bank accounts .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ian Lamont writes "Remember the report last year that the FBI was concerned about a 'vishing' exploit relating to the Asterisk IP PBX software?
Digium played down the report, noting that it was based on a bug that had already been patched, but now the company's open-source community director says that attacks on Asterisk installations are 'endemic.
' There have been dozens of reported vishing attacks in recent weeks, says the article: 'The victims typically bank with smaller regional institutions, which typically have fewer resources to detect scams.
Scammers hack into phone systems and then call victims, playing prerecorded messages that say there has been a billing error or warn them that the bank account has been suspended because of suspicious activity.
If the worried customer enters his account number and ATM password, the bad guys use that information to make fake debit cards and empty their victim's bank accounts.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901963</id>
	<title>Adaptation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256721060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Our continued technological advancement is having a transformative impact on our way of life (duh).  We are creating a world in which one needs ever-higher levels of intelligence (and, more importantly, critical-thinking capacity) just to survive.</p><p>Back in the good old days the majority of the human race didn't need to know much more than how to farm (with very simple farming technologies).  The intellectual problems they faced weren't very sophisticated.</p><p>Today, a seemingly harmless deed like giving an account number (which doesn't really seem secret since it gets printed on checks and stuff) over the phone can result in someone losing everything they had worked for all their lives, and having ruined credit on top of it.</p><p>How does one protect themselves from this scam?  Knowing the details of this specific scam is not sufficient.  There are a whole host of other scams with different details.  One must protect one's self from the entire class of scams, and the only way to do that is to have a basic knowledge of how "the system" works (whichever system is in question) as well as a basic capacity to think before one acts and determine if the action being requested is actually likely to be necessary, and whether or not it might be risky.  There are also judgments one must make about when one can and cannot trust the voice on the other end of the phone, when one does and does not realistically have a choice, and so on.</p><p>All of these mental activities require mature and insightful brains.  Education (as to the details of "the system") is also a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition, for personal saftey.</p><p>Some people believe that critical thinking ability is more hereditary than learned.  I am no geneticist, but whether it is nature or nurture the bottom line remains: there is a class of person who was born and raised in a technologically advanced nation, but is not mentally capable of surviving in this nation.  And this class of person is going to be (slowly and painfully) purged from the human condition because of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Our continued technological advancement is having a transformative impact on our way of life ( duh ) .
We are creating a world in which one needs ever-higher levels of intelligence ( and , more importantly , critical-thinking capacity ) just to survive.Back in the good old days the majority of the human race did n't need to know much more than how to farm ( with very simple farming technologies ) .
The intellectual problems they faced were n't very sophisticated.Today , a seemingly harmless deed like giving an account number ( which does n't really seem secret since it gets printed on checks and stuff ) over the phone can result in someone losing everything they had worked for all their lives , and having ruined credit on top of it.How does one protect themselves from this scam ?
Knowing the details of this specific scam is not sufficient .
There are a whole host of other scams with different details .
One must protect one 's self from the entire class of scams , and the only way to do that is to have a basic knowledge of how " the system " works ( whichever system is in question ) as well as a basic capacity to think before one acts and determine if the action being requested is actually likely to be necessary , and whether or not it might be risky .
There are also judgments one must make about when one can and can not trust the voice on the other end of the phone , when one does and does not realistically have a choice , and so on.All of these mental activities require mature and insightful brains .
Education ( as to the details of " the system " ) is also a necessary condition , but not a sufficient condition , for personal saftey.Some people believe that critical thinking ability is more hereditary than learned .
I am no geneticist , but whether it is nature or nurture the bottom line remains : there is a class of person who was born and raised in a technologically advanced nation , but is not mentally capable of surviving in this nation .
And this class of person is going to be ( slowly and painfully ) purged from the human condition because of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our continued technological advancement is having a transformative impact on our way of life (duh).
We are creating a world in which one needs ever-higher levels of intelligence (and, more importantly, critical-thinking capacity) just to survive.Back in the good old days the majority of the human race didn't need to know much more than how to farm (with very simple farming technologies).
The intellectual problems they faced weren't very sophisticated.Today, a seemingly harmless deed like giving an account number (which doesn't really seem secret since it gets printed on checks and stuff) over the phone can result in someone losing everything they had worked for all their lives, and having ruined credit on top of it.How does one protect themselves from this scam?
Knowing the details of this specific scam is not sufficient.
There are a whole host of other scams with different details.
One must protect one's self from the entire class of scams, and the only way to do that is to have a basic knowledge of how "the system" works (whichever system is in question) as well as a basic capacity to think before one acts and determine if the action being requested is actually likely to be necessary, and whether or not it might be risky.
There are also judgments one must make about when one can and cannot trust the voice on the other end of the phone, when one does and does not realistically have a choice, and so on.All of these mental activities require mature and insightful brains.
Education (as to the details of "the system") is also a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition, for personal saftey.Some people believe that critical thinking ability is more hereditary than learned.
I am no geneticist, but whether it is nature or nurture the bottom line remains: there is a class of person who was born and raised in a technologically advanced nation, but is not mentally capable of surviving in this nation.
And this class of person is going to be (slowly and painfully) purged from the human condition because of this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899607</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1256754360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I always hang up as soon as I recognize them for what they are.</p></div><p>
Not me.  I set the phone on my desk, press the &quot;mute&quot; button and tie up the telemarketers' phone lines for as long as possible while I get back to reading<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.<b>^w^w^w</b>work.  Kind of a low-tech <a href="http://labrea.sourceforge.net/labrea-info.html" title="sourceforge.net">La Brea tar pit</a> [sourceforge.net].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always hang up as soon as I recognize them for what they are .
Not me .
I set the phone on my desk , press the " mute " button and tie up the telemarketers ' phone lines for as long as possible while I get back to reading /. ^ w ^ w ^ wwork .
Kind of a low-tech La Brea tar pit [ sourceforge.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always hang up as soon as I recognize them for what they are.
Not me.
I set the phone on my desk, press the "mute" button and tie up the telemarketers' phone lines for as long as possible while I get back to reading /.^w^w^wwork.
Kind of a low-tech La Brea tar pit [sourceforge.net].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899465</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1256753880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I second this sentiment.  Let's reserve "Vishing" for people pretending to be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu" title="wikipedia.org">Vishnu</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure we could come up with a better term than " vishing " .
I second this sentiment .
Let 's reserve " Vishing " for people pretending to be Vishnu [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".
I second this sentiment.
Let's reserve "Vishing" for people pretending to be Vishnu [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899125</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>MiniMike</author>
	<datestamp>1256752320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"? And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?</p></div><p>How about <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/varmint" title="merriam-webster.com">varmints</a> [merriam-webster.com] and pharmints?</p><p>Telemarketers don't deserve a new word, especially when an existing one fits so well.  Phreakers at least are exhibiting some level of skill, even if it is in a somewhat antisocial manner (so I assume, at least).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's next , we 're going to call telemarketers " vammers " ?
And we 'll call phreakers " vackers " ? How about varmints [ merriam-webster.com ] and pharmints ? Telemarketers do n't deserve a new word , especially when an existing one fits so well .
Phreakers at least are exhibiting some level of skill , even if it is in a somewhat antisocial manner ( so I assume , at least ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?
And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?How about varmints [merriam-webster.com] and pharmints?Telemarketers don't deserve a new word, especially when an existing one fits so well.
Phreakers at least are exhibiting some level of skill, even if it is in a somewhat antisocial manner (so I assume, at least).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902581</id>
	<title>Digium says: Protocol, not program</title>
	<author>Rememberthisname</author>
	<datestamp>1256724180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So as is unfortunately typical, some of the quotes I made of course been taken out of proportion.  My quote was not that "Asterisk attacks are endemic", but that SIP-based brute force attacks are endemic.  Every SIP system that is open to the "public" Internet is seeing large numbers of brute-force attacks.  Sites that have weak username and weak password control will be compromised - this is little different than email accounts being taken over by password-guessing systems and used for sending floods of email.  The significant difference is that when someone takes over a SIP platform to make outbound calls, there is usually a direct monetary cost, which gets people's attention very quickly.  I hear reports of these types of attacks now all the time - it's not unusual, and it's not just Asterisk.  We had a blog about this a year ago; this is just a re-packaging of the same news a year later, when recently I unsurprisingly said that attacks are no longer even newsworthy because they're so frequent (hence, the term "endemic".)  Apparently, not being newsworthy means... it's newsworthy!</p><p>This has little to do with Asterisk other than it happens to be the most prevalent SIP-based platform on the Internet currently.  It has everything to do with protocol attacks by script kiddies, or more professional attackers.  Bad passwords = easy penetration.  The upside on this is that it yet again gets the attention of administrators who might not otherwise know that their password of '1234' might be guessed by criminal users.</p><p>The bug that was mentioned?  Old news.  Really, really old news.  And really not even that much of a threat for most people the way they have their systems configured even if they haven't upgraded.</p><p>Asterisk, Broadsoft, Cisco, Kamailio, OpenSER, FreeSwitch, Avaya - they're all vulnerable to the brute force attacks if adequate network and username/password security is not implemented.  There are ways to minimize, if not eliminate these threats with very standard security policies that should be familiar to any network administrator (ACLs, random passphrases, random client usernames, adequate exception logging, and limits on account usage, to name a few.)</p><p>Just as an aside, the Digium SwitchVox platform, which is our commercial re-packaging of Asterisk, has as an element of it's GUI a tool that indicates the relative strength of passwords.  We'd encourage any other re-packagers or users of Asterisk to implement a similar UI hint that forces good password behavior by users and local admins.  It's really not something that can be done in the core of Asterisk; it has to be done by whatever is the layered UI on top of Asterisk for configuration, or just by good policy.</p><p><a href="http://blogs.digium.com/2009/03/28/sip-security/" title="digium.com" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.digium.com/2009/03/28/sip-security/</a> [digium.com]<br><a href="http://blogs.digium.com/2008/12/06/sip-security-and-asterisk/" title="digium.com" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.digium.com/2008/12/06/sip-security-and-asterisk/</a> [digium.com]</p><p>John Todd - jtodd@digium.com<br>Digium, Inc.<br>Asterisk Open Source Community Director</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So as is unfortunately typical , some of the quotes I made of course been taken out of proportion .
My quote was not that " Asterisk attacks are endemic " , but that SIP-based brute force attacks are endemic .
Every SIP system that is open to the " public " Internet is seeing large numbers of brute-force attacks .
Sites that have weak username and weak password control will be compromised - this is little different than email accounts being taken over by password-guessing systems and used for sending floods of email .
The significant difference is that when someone takes over a SIP platform to make outbound calls , there is usually a direct monetary cost , which gets people 's attention very quickly .
I hear reports of these types of attacks now all the time - it 's not unusual , and it 's not just Asterisk .
We had a blog about this a year ago ; this is just a re-packaging of the same news a year later , when recently I unsurprisingly said that attacks are no longer even newsworthy because they 're so frequent ( hence , the term " endemic " .
) Apparently , not being newsworthy means... it 's newsworthy ! This has little to do with Asterisk other than it happens to be the most prevalent SIP-based platform on the Internet currently .
It has everything to do with protocol attacks by script kiddies , or more professional attackers .
Bad passwords = easy penetration .
The upside on this is that it yet again gets the attention of administrators who might not otherwise know that their password of '1234 ' might be guessed by criminal users.The bug that was mentioned ?
Old news .
Really , really old news .
And really not even that much of a threat for most people the way they have their systems configured even if they have n't upgraded.Asterisk , Broadsoft , Cisco , Kamailio , OpenSER , FreeSwitch , Avaya - they 're all vulnerable to the brute force attacks if adequate network and username/password security is not implemented .
There are ways to minimize , if not eliminate these threats with very standard security policies that should be familiar to any network administrator ( ACLs , random passphrases , random client usernames , adequate exception logging , and limits on account usage , to name a few .
) Just as an aside , the Digium SwitchVox platform , which is our commercial re-packaging of Asterisk , has as an element of it 's GUI a tool that indicates the relative strength of passwords .
We 'd encourage any other re-packagers or users of Asterisk to implement a similar UI hint that forces good password behavior by users and local admins .
It 's really not something that can be done in the core of Asterisk ; it has to be done by whatever is the layered UI on top of Asterisk for configuration , or just by good policy.http : //blogs.digium.com/2009/03/28/sip-security/ [ digium.com ] http : //blogs.digium.com/2008/12/06/sip-security-and-asterisk/ [ digium.com ] John Todd - jtodd @ digium.comDigium , Inc.Asterisk Open Source Community Director</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So as is unfortunately typical, some of the quotes I made of course been taken out of proportion.
My quote was not that "Asterisk attacks are endemic", but that SIP-based brute force attacks are endemic.
Every SIP system that is open to the "public" Internet is seeing large numbers of brute-force attacks.
Sites that have weak username and weak password control will be compromised - this is little different than email accounts being taken over by password-guessing systems and used for sending floods of email.
The significant difference is that when someone takes over a SIP platform to make outbound calls, there is usually a direct monetary cost, which gets people's attention very quickly.
I hear reports of these types of attacks now all the time - it's not unusual, and it's not just Asterisk.
We had a blog about this a year ago; this is just a re-packaging of the same news a year later, when recently I unsurprisingly said that attacks are no longer even newsworthy because they're so frequent (hence, the term "endemic".
)  Apparently, not being newsworthy means... it's newsworthy!This has little to do with Asterisk other than it happens to be the most prevalent SIP-based platform on the Internet currently.
It has everything to do with protocol attacks by script kiddies, or more professional attackers.
Bad passwords = easy penetration.
The upside on this is that it yet again gets the attention of administrators who might not otherwise know that their password of '1234' might be guessed by criminal users.The bug that was mentioned?
Old news.
Really, really old news.
And really not even that much of a threat for most people the way they have their systems configured even if they haven't upgraded.Asterisk, Broadsoft, Cisco, Kamailio, OpenSER, FreeSwitch, Avaya - they're all vulnerable to the brute force attacks if adequate network and username/password security is not implemented.
There are ways to minimize, if not eliminate these threats with very standard security policies that should be familiar to any network administrator (ACLs, random passphrases, random client usernames, adequate exception logging, and limits on account usage, to name a few.
)Just as an aside, the Digium SwitchVox platform, which is our commercial re-packaging of Asterisk, has as an element of it's GUI a tool that indicates the relative strength of passwords.
We'd encourage any other re-packagers or users of Asterisk to implement a similar UI hint that forces good password behavior by users and local admins.
It's really not something that can be done in the core of Asterisk; it has to be done by whatever is the layered UI on top of Asterisk for configuration, or just by good policy.http://blogs.digium.com/2009/03/28/sip-security/ [digium.com]http://blogs.digium.com/2008/12/06/sip-security-and-asterisk/ [digium.com]John Todd - jtodd@digium.comDigium, Inc.Asterisk Open Source Community Director
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29910997</id>
	<title>First Service Credit Union - Milwaukee, WI</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256833620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If anyone banks with these folks be advised their system was compromised about two days ago.  I am not a customer of theirs but I still have a Milwaukee area code cell phone (currently reside in Orlando).  They only have two branches, as the article indicated a small institution.  I forwarded them these articles so hopefully they will take corrective action.</p><p>Branch Info:<br>333 N 35th St<br>Milwaukee, WI 53208-4108<br>(414) 342-7660</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If anyone banks with these folks be advised their system was compromised about two days ago .
I am not a customer of theirs but I still have a Milwaukee area code cell phone ( currently reside in Orlando ) .
They only have two branches , as the article indicated a small institution .
I forwarded them these articles so hopefully they will take corrective action.Branch Info : 333 N 35th StMilwaukee , WI 53208-4108 ( 414 ) 342-7660</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anyone banks with these folks be advised their system was compromised about two days ago.
I am not a customer of theirs but I still have a Milwaukee area code cell phone (currently reside in Orlando).
They only have two branches, as the article indicated a small institution.
I forwarded them these articles so hopefully they will take corrective action.Branch Info:333 N 35th StMilwaukee, WI 53208-4108(414) 342-7660</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</id>
	<title>\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256748420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always hang up as soon as I recognize them for what they are.  On the rare occasions when someone who actually has something to say that I need to hear tries to use one they always follow up with a real phone call or a letter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always hang up as soon as I recognize them for what they are .
On the rare occasions when someone who actually has something to say that I need to hear tries to use one they always follow up with a real phone call or a letter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always hang up as soon as I recognize them for what they are.
On the rare occasions when someone who actually has something to say that I need to hear tries to use one they always follow up with a real phone call or a letter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900623</id>
	<title>not just asterix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256758200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been noticing in my firewall logs a lot attacking with strange user names  (not the usual root and test etc.)</p><p>When I googled it I found out it was a default system account for some commercial VOIP product.  Seemed not very useful to me at the time, but now I get it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been noticing in my firewall logs a lot attacking with strange user names ( not the usual root and test etc .
) When I googled it I found out it was a default system account for some commercial VOIP product .
Seemed not very useful to me at the time , but now I get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been noticing in my firewall logs a lot attacking with strange user names  (not the usual root and test etc.
)When I googled it I found out it was a default system account for some commercial VOIP product.
Seemed not very useful to me at the time, but now I get it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29908353</id>
	<title>Re:Digium says: Protocol, not program</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1256818680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>John, one of the ways I got people to use "good" passwords is by getting them a <a href="http://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey/" title="yubico.com">Yubikey</a> [yubico.com] and setting it to static mode.  It then always generates the same password instead of an OTP, but it's a very long one and as it pretends to be a keyboard it types it in itself.  The challenge is always to make it long enough to be safe, but short enough to actually fit in the entry field.</p><p>It is a simple way to both SET a decent password and to preserve that setting in other than a file..</p><p>Just a tip, and no, I don't work for Yubico.  I just got one to play with any I like it (must go and buy some)..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>John , one of the ways I got people to use " good " passwords is by getting them a Yubikey [ yubico.com ] and setting it to static mode .
It then always generates the same password instead of an OTP , but it 's a very long one and as it pretends to be a keyboard it types it in itself .
The challenge is always to make it long enough to be safe , but short enough to actually fit in the entry field.It is a simple way to both SET a decent password and to preserve that setting in other than a file..Just a tip , and no , I do n't work for Yubico .
I just got one to play with any I like it ( must go and buy some ) . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>John, one of the ways I got people to use "good" passwords is by getting them a Yubikey [yubico.com] and setting it to static mode.
It then always generates the same password instead of an OTP, but it's a very long one and as it pretends to be a keyboard it types it in itself.
The challenge is always to make it long enough to be safe, but short enough to actually fit in the entry field.It is a simple way to both SET a decent password and to preserve that setting in other than a file..Just a tip, and no, I don't work for Yubico.
I just got one to play with any I like it (must go and buy some)..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29909893</id>
	<title>Don't allow SIP or IAX access from the internet</title>
	<author>noahisaac</author>
	<datestamp>1256829540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm an asterisk administrator for several systems.  I try to keep them up-to-date with the latest versions that patch security flaws, but I can't always get them updated immediately.  The easy answer is to just not allow SIP or IAX (or MGCP, SCCP, etc) access from the entire internet.  I firewall off those ports except to certain locations that require access to them.<br> <br>

One big question I have, though, is what about all those appliance-type IP-PBX's from the old-school vendors like Panasonic and Toshiba?  I would wager that the vast majority of those are NEVER updated after installation.  Surely they are subject to many of the same security flaws that Asterisk's SIP stack are.  I know that at least one of Asterisk's security advisories was for a fundamental flaw in the SIP protocol.  All SIP-capable PBX's would be vulnerable to this.  Are Panasonic and Toshiba just not talking openly about this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm an asterisk administrator for several systems .
I try to keep them up-to-date with the latest versions that patch security flaws , but I ca n't always get them updated immediately .
The easy answer is to just not allow SIP or IAX ( or MGCP , SCCP , etc ) access from the entire internet .
I firewall off those ports except to certain locations that require access to them .
One big question I have , though , is what about all those appliance-type IP-PBX 's from the old-school vendors like Panasonic and Toshiba ?
I would wager that the vast majority of those are NEVER updated after installation .
Surely they are subject to many of the same security flaws that Asterisk 's SIP stack are .
I know that at least one of Asterisk 's security advisories was for a fundamental flaw in the SIP protocol .
All SIP-capable PBX 's would be vulnerable to this .
Are Panasonic and Toshiba just not talking openly about this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm an asterisk administrator for several systems.
I try to keep them up-to-date with the latest versions that patch security flaws, but I can't always get them updated immediately.
The easy answer is to just not allow SIP or IAX (or MGCP, SCCP, etc) access from the entire internet.
I firewall off those ports except to certain locations that require access to them.
One big question I have, though, is what about all those appliance-type IP-PBX's from the old-school vendors like Panasonic and Toshiba?
I would wager that the vast majority of those are NEVER updated after installation.
Surely they are subject to many of the same security flaws that Asterisk's SIP stack are.
I know that at least one of Asterisk's security advisories was for a fundamental flaw in the SIP protocol.
All SIP-capable PBX's would be vulnerable to this.
Are Panasonic and Toshiba just not talking openly about this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898499</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1256749560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, "Phishing" still seems to apply as an appropriate term to describe social engineering attempts by email, which is already a pretty specialized term, where "email fraud" would have worked just as well to start with (since it is closely related to an existing term "mail fraud" which indicates the snail mail version of the same attempt).  As usual, a term was invented to describe something that is harder for the layman to understand than the original term.  Hey, we're geeks, new confusing terms are cool, so deal.  1337 n3w w0rdz0rz ru1z!</p><p>A phisher is still sending someone an email and asking them to take a specific action that, if you take it, will result in you giving up important information to someone wearing a black hat.  We don't need separate terms to describe every possible nuance of the way you would potentially send the information back.  If someone sends me an email with form they want me to fill out and mail, do I have to call that mhishing?  And what if they want me to fax it?  fhishing?  What if they simply want me to reply to them with some information?  rhishing?</p><p>What if you get an email that gives a bad link *AND* a scammer's phone number?  pvhishing?  Or does the order of the "p" and "v" depend on which appears in the email fraud attempt first, so it could be pvishing or vphishing?  And do I read that right-to-left or top-to-bottom to determine "first"?</p><p>Is there a 3-week class on this new terminology, or a 12-step program to get people to stop using it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , " Phishing " still seems to apply as an appropriate term to describe social engineering attempts by email , which is already a pretty specialized term , where " email fraud " would have worked just as well to start with ( since it is closely related to an existing term " mail fraud " which indicates the snail mail version of the same attempt ) .
As usual , a term was invented to describe something that is harder for the layman to understand than the original term .
Hey , we 're geeks , new confusing terms are cool , so deal .
1337 n3w w0rdz0rz ru1z ! A phisher is still sending someone an email and asking them to take a specific action that , if you take it , will result in you giving up important information to someone wearing a black hat .
We do n't need separate terms to describe every possible nuance of the way you would potentially send the information back .
If someone sends me an email with form they want me to fill out and mail , do I have to call that mhishing ?
And what if they want me to fax it ?
fhishing ? What if they simply want me to reply to them with some information ?
rhishing ? What if you get an email that gives a bad link * AND * a scammer 's phone number ?
pvhishing ? Or does the order of the " p " and " v " depend on which appears in the email fraud attempt first , so it could be pvishing or vphishing ?
And do I read that right-to-left or top-to-bottom to determine " first " ? Is there a 3-week class on this new terminology , or a 12-step program to get people to stop using it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, "Phishing" still seems to apply as an appropriate term to describe social engineering attempts by email, which is already a pretty specialized term, where "email fraud" would have worked just as well to start with (since it is closely related to an existing term "mail fraud" which indicates the snail mail version of the same attempt).
As usual, a term was invented to describe something that is harder for the layman to understand than the original term.
Hey, we're geeks, new confusing terms are cool, so deal.
1337 n3w w0rdz0rz ru1z!A phisher is still sending someone an email and asking them to take a specific action that, if you take it, will result in you giving up important information to someone wearing a black hat.
We don't need separate terms to describe every possible nuance of the way you would potentially send the information back.
If someone sends me an email with form they want me to fill out and mail, do I have to call that mhishing?
And what if they want me to fax it?
fhishing?  What if they simply want me to reply to them with some information?
rhishing?What if you get an email that gives a bad link *AND* a scammer's phone number?
pvhishing?  Or does the order of the "p" and "v" depend on which appears in the email fraud attempt first, so it could be pvishing or vphishing?
And do I read that right-to-left or top-to-bottom to determine "first"?Is there a 3-week class on this new terminology, or a 12-step program to get people to stop using it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898331</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1256748900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Vishing? Really?</p><p>What is that, voice phishing? What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"? And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?</p><p>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".</p></div></blockquote><p>If the alternative is phreashing and phreammers, then I'll prefer "vishing". That said, I doubt most cases are using an actual "bug" in Asterisk, it is much more likely there are different setups, were some are incorrectly setup to handle \_one\_ of the many combinations of diversion, refer, redirection, route, proxy, RFC and draft SIP features that Asterisk "supports".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vishing ?
Really ? What is that , voice phishing ?
What 's next , we 're going to call telemarketers " vammers " ?
And we 'll call phreakers " vackers " ? I 'm sure we could come up with a better term than " vishing " .If the alternative is phreashing and phreammers , then I 'll prefer " vishing " .
That said , I doubt most cases are using an actual " bug " in Asterisk , it is much more likely there are different setups , were some are incorrectly setup to handle \ _one \ _ of the many combinations of diversion , refer , redirection , route , proxy , RFC and draft SIP features that Asterisk " supports " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vishing?
Really?What is that, voice phishing?
What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?
And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".If the alternative is phreashing and phreammers, then I'll prefer "vishing".
That said, I doubt most cases are using an actual "bug" in Asterisk, it is much more likely there are different setups, were some are incorrectly setup to handle \_one\_ of the many combinations of diversion, refer, redirection, route, proxy, RFC and draft SIP features that Asterisk "supports".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899315</id>
	<title>Re:I got one of those calls.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256753280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>While you're at it, why not also load up some phony data to the vishers then?  Might as well pollute their dataset until some authority is able to shut them down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While you 're at it , why not also load up some phony data to the vishers then ?
Might as well pollute their dataset until some authority is able to shut them down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you're at it, why not also load up some phony data to the vishers then?
Might as well pollute their dataset until some authority is able to shut them down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993</id>
	<title>Complete crap</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256751780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a load of crap. Asterisk developers patch security holes relatively quickly. This isn't an Asterisk "endemic."</p><p>Brute forced passwords are a bad administrator "endemic."</p><p>If your password policy is so stupid that you can be wordlisted then the issue may just be a PICNIC problem and not a fault of an application.</p><p>Asterisk isn't a security application. It's an enterprise-grade VoIP server and PBX.</p><p>Connecting Asterisk to a public network without some sort of border control is just stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a load of crap .
Asterisk developers patch security holes relatively quickly .
This is n't an Asterisk " endemic .
" Brute forced passwords are a bad administrator " endemic .
" If your password policy is so stupid that you can be wordlisted then the issue may just be a PICNIC problem and not a fault of an application.Asterisk is n't a security application .
It 's an enterprise-grade VoIP server and PBX.Connecting Asterisk to a public network without some sort of border control is just stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a load of crap.
Asterisk developers patch security holes relatively quickly.
This isn't an Asterisk "endemic.
"Brute forced passwords are a bad administrator "endemic.
"If your password policy is so stupid that you can be wordlisted then the issue may just be a PICNIC problem and not a fault of an application.Asterisk isn't a security application.
It's an enterprise-grade VoIP server and PBX.Connecting Asterisk to a public network without some sort of border control is just stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899779</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1256754960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Vishing" is what it is called when <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu" title="wikipedia.org">Vishnu</a> [wikipedia.org] goes <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing" title="wikipedia.org">fishing</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Vishing " is what it is called when Vishnu [ wikipedia.org ] goes fishing [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Vishing" is what it is called when Vishnu [wikipedia.org] goes fishing [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900687</id>
	<title>Re:Fishing, phishing, vishing, what's next?</title>
	<author>sconeu</author>
	<datestamp>1256758500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just vish zat zey vould ztop vith the forced vords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just vish zat zey vould ztop vith the forced vords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just vish zat zey vould ztop vith the forced vords.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905015</id>
	<title>Vishing and hoping</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1256738040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'Vishing', eh? Vot are we going to call 'video phishing'?</p><p>Pishing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'Vishing ' , eh ?
Vot are we going to call 'video phishing ' ? Pishing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Vishing', eh?
Vot are we going to call 'video phishing'?Pishing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899851</id>
	<title>Re:Lock Down Your Phones, People!</title>
	<author>diego.viola</author>
	<datestamp>1256755200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with mercutioviz, FreeSWITCH is a much better tool than anything else I ever seen in the OSS or proprietary world when it comes to VoIP and telecommunications.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with mercutioviz , FreeSWITCH is a much better tool than anything else I ever seen in the OSS or proprietary world when it comes to VoIP and telecommunications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with mercutioviz, FreeSWITCH is a much better tool than anything else I ever seen in the OSS or proprietary world when it comes to VoIP and telecommunications.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901449</id>
	<title>Re:Moral of the story</title>
	<author>CRiMSON</author>
	<datestamp>1256761920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup, keep yer money in your sock like I do! No one gets it, and you ever get in trouble you can bust out the sock and weild that shit like a blackjack tear it up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup , keep yer money in your sock like I do !
No one gets it , and you ever get in trouble you can bust out the sock and weild that shit like a blackjack tear it up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup, keep yer money in your sock like I do!
No one gets it, and you ever get in trouble you can bust out the sock and weild that shit like a blackjack tear it up!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899931</id>
	<title>Re:Complete crap</title>
	<author>diego.viola</author>
	<datestamp>1256755620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Asterisk is by no means a carrier-grade server, and it has many problems, these problems include bugs, deadlocks, etc.<br><br>You probably never worked on the telecom field to say that, the fact is that there is a much better alternative and that alternative is FreeSWITCH.<br><br>Just take a look at this:<br><br>"How does FreeSWITCH compare to Asterisk?"<br>http://www.freeswitch.org/node/117</htmltext>
<tokenext>Asterisk is by no means a carrier-grade server , and it has many problems , these problems include bugs , deadlocks , etc.You probably never worked on the telecom field to say that , the fact is that there is a much better alternative and that alternative is FreeSWITCH.Just take a look at this : " How does FreeSWITCH compare to Asterisk ?
" http : //www.freeswitch.org/node/117</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asterisk is by no means a carrier-grade server, and it has many problems, these problems include bugs, deadlocks, etc.You probably never worked on the telecom field to say that, the fact is that there is a much better alternative and that alternative is FreeSWITCH.Just take a look at this:"How does FreeSWITCH compare to Asterisk?
"http://www.freeswitch.org/node/117</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903223</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256727480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Vishing?  Really?</p><p>What is that, voice phishing?  What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?  And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?</p><p>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".</p></div><p>I think I just spit coffee on my monitor!!!</p><p>Kim<br><a href="http://www.kids-water-shoes-online.com/" title="kids-water...online.com" rel="nofollow">kids water shoes</a> [kids-water...online.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vishing ?
Really ? What is that , voice phishing ?
What 's next , we 're going to call telemarketers " vammers " ?
And we 'll call phreakers " vackers " ? I 'm sure we could come up with a better term than " vishing " .I think I just spit coffee on my monitor ! !
! Kimkids water shoes [ kids-water...online.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vishing?
Really?What is that, voice phishing?
What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?
And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".I think I just spit coffee on my monitor!!
!Kimkids water shoes [kids-water...online.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900705</id>
	<title>Re:Fishing, phishing, vishing, what's next?</title>
	<author>MrSenile</author>
	<datestamp>1256758620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a relative that used to raise ghots.  Some veeps and vickens, too.</p><p>Every morning you voke the vows, and vilked them vry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a relative that used to raise ghots .
Some veeps and vickens , too.Every morning you voke the vows , and vilked them vry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a relative that used to raise ghots.
Some veeps and vickens, too.Every morning you voke the vows, and vilked them vry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898651</id>
	<title>I got one of those calls.</title>
	<author>GrantRobertson</author>
	<datestamp>1256750340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hung up and immediately called the FBI. I'm glad they are actually doing something about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hung up and immediately called the FBI .
I 'm glad they are actually doing something about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hung up and immediately called the FBI.
I'm glad they are actually doing something about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898933</id>
	<title>Re:Fishing, phishing, vishing, what's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256751540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.  I wish there was a "funny and educational" mod option.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Brilliant , absolutely brilliant .
I wish there was a " funny and educational " mod option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.
I wish there was a "funny and educational" mod option.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905401</id>
	<title>Re:Moral of the story</title>
	<author>stephanruby</author>
	<datestamp>1256741340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you bank says there's something wrong with your account, either call them via their listed phone number or go visit them in person.</p></div><p>This is missing the point of the article. It's the banks voice mail systems that were compromised. So even if you call them back at their official listed number, you may still be duped by their re-programmed voice mail system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you bank says there 's something wrong with your account , either call them via their listed phone number or go visit them in person.This is missing the point of the article .
It 's the banks voice mail systems that were compromised .
So even if you call them back at their official listed number , you may still be duped by their re-programmed voice mail system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you bank says there's something wrong with your account, either call them via their listed phone number or go visit them in person.This is missing the point of the article.
It's the banks voice mail systems that were compromised.
So even if you call them back at their official listed number, you may still be duped by their re-programmed voice mail system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451</id>
	<title>Fishing, phishing, vishing, what's next?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1256749380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fast-forward to 2109... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghoti" title="wikipedia.org">ghoting</a> [wikipedia.org] attacks are on the rise, but nobody knows what the hell they are.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fast-forward to 2109... ghoting [ wikipedia.org ] attacks are on the rise , but nobody knows what the hell they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fast-forward to 2109... ghoting [wikipedia.org] attacks are on the rise, but nobody knows what the hell they are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903797</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256730660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Vat do you have against ze term vishing? Ve chldren of ze night have hopes und dreams too. Vy, every day I vish for ze accursed sun to never rise again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Vat do you have against ze term vishing ?
Ve chldren of ze night have hopes und dreams too .
Vy , every day I vish for ze accursed sun to never rise again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vat do you have against ze term vishing?
Ve chldren of ze night have hopes und dreams too.
Vy, every day I vish for ze accursed sun to never rise again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898641</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256750280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't answer the home phone at all. It is always some pre-recorded message from the High School or Middle School or some political candidate who "approved this message". Last night - a new low. Some political candidate actually automatically joined us to a conference call he had organized. It started with a pre-recorded message saying it was going to join this conference on some shit and then it joined. All this was being recorded by the answering machine. We had to get up and pick up the phone and hang it up to stop the answering machine (digital) from recording. I don't know what the max recording time per message is on that model of answering box but it recorded about 2 minutes before we hung up. So now some politico can use up a good solid chuck of our answering machine space with their gobbledygook. Crazy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't answer the home phone at all .
It is always some pre-recorded message from the High School or Middle School or some political candidate who " approved this message " .
Last night - a new low .
Some political candidate actually automatically joined us to a conference call he had organized .
It started with a pre-recorded message saying it was going to join this conference on some shit and then it joined .
All this was being recorded by the answering machine .
We had to get up and pick up the phone and hang it up to stop the answering machine ( digital ) from recording .
I do n't know what the max recording time per message is on that model of answering box but it recorded about 2 minutes before we hung up .
So now some politico can use up a good solid chuck of our answering machine space with their gobbledygook .
Crazy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't answer the home phone at all.
It is always some pre-recorded message from the High School or Middle School or some political candidate who "approved this message".
Last night - a new low.
Some political candidate actually automatically joined us to a conference call he had organized.
It started with a pre-recorded message saying it was going to join this conference on some shit and then it joined.
All this was being recorded by the answering machine.
We had to get up and pick up the phone and hang it up to stop the answering machine (digital) from recording.
I don't know what the max recording time per message is on that model of answering box but it recorded about 2 minutes before we hung up.
So now some politico can use up a good solid chuck of our answering machine space with their gobbledygook.
Crazy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899277</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Tony Hoyle</author>
	<datestamp>1256753100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>vishing is what Dracula does on his holidays.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>vishing is what Dracula does on his holidays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>vishing is what Dracula does on his holidays.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898745</id>
	<title>Hello, This Is YABRIL OMOTAYO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256750820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from <a href="http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=us&amp;cf=all&amp;ncl=dfTLCpP-RVlcW0M8Kd80EiTeym\_TM" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">G.M.A.C.</a> [google.com].<br>We owe you a credit on your current loan for your Government Motors clunker and need your bank account number and Social Security Number to deposit this credit in your bank.  Do wish to proceed with this authorization?</p><p><a href="http://current.cf.huffingtonpost.com/" title="huffingtonpost.com" rel="nofollow">Yes</a> [huffingtonpost.com].</p><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">No</a> [microsoft.com].</p><p>Thank you for your cooperation.</p><p>Yours In Lahore,<br>Y. Omotayo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>from G.M.A.C .
[ google.com ] .We owe you a credit on your current loan for your Government Motors clunker and need your bank account number and Social Security Number to deposit this credit in your bank .
Do wish to proceed with this authorization ? Yes [ huffingtonpost.com ] .No [ microsoft.com ] .Thank you for your cooperation.Yours In Lahore,Y .
Omotayo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from G.M.A.C.
[google.com].We owe you a credit on your current loan for your Government Motors clunker and need your bank account number and Social Security Number to deposit this credit in your bank.
Do wish to proceed with this authorization?Yes [huffingtonpost.com].No [microsoft.com].Thank you for your cooperation.Yours In Lahore,Y.
Omotayo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903519</id>
	<title>Re:Digium says: Protocol, not program</title>
	<author>Carnildo</author>
	<datestamp>1256728920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Just as an aside, the Digium SwitchVox platform, which is our commercial re-packaging of Asterisk, has as an element of it's GUI a tool that indicates the relative strength of passwords. We'd encourage any other re-packagers or users of Asterisk to implement a similar UI hint that forces good password behavior by users and local admins.</p></div></blockquote><p>There's no good algorithm for telling the strength of a password (password strength is related to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov\_complexity" title="wikipedia.org">Kolmogorov complexity</a> [wikipedia.org] of the password, which is incomputable), and every password-strength indicator I've seen uses heuristics that either accept weak passwords ("Password1" is strong because it's nine characters, a mix of upper- and lower-case, and has a non-letter) or rejects strong passwords ("this password is very very strong even though it only contains lowercase letters because it is a long password and plain english has between one and two bits of randomness per letter").</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just as an aside , the Digium SwitchVox platform , which is our commercial re-packaging of Asterisk , has as an element of it 's GUI a tool that indicates the relative strength of passwords .
We 'd encourage any other re-packagers or users of Asterisk to implement a similar UI hint that forces good password behavior by users and local admins.There 's no good algorithm for telling the strength of a password ( password strength is related to the Kolmogorov complexity [ wikipedia.org ] of the password , which is incomputable ) , and every password-strength indicator I 've seen uses heuristics that either accept weak passwords ( " Password1 " is strong because it 's nine characters , a mix of upper- and lower-case , and has a non-letter ) or rejects strong passwords ( " this password is very very strong even though it only contains lowercase letters because it is a long password and plain english has between one and two bits of randomness per letter " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just as an aside, the Digium SwitchVox platform, which is our commercial re-packaging of Asterisk, has as an element of it's GUI a tool that indicates the relative strength of passwords.
We'd encourage any other re-packagers or users of Asterisk to implement a similar UI hint that forces good password behavior by users and local admins.There's no good algorithm for telling the strength of a password (password strength is related to the Kolmogorov complexity [wikipedia.org] of the password, which is incomputable), and every password-strength indicator I've seen uses heuristics that either accept weak passwords ("Password1" is strong because it's nine characters, a mix of upper- and lower-case, and has a non-letter) or rejects strong passwords ("this password is very very strong even though it only contains lowercase letters because it is a long password and plain english has between one and two bits of randomness per letter").
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905159</id>
	<title>You're not getting in MY Asterisk setup</title>
	<author>Centurix</author>
	<datestamp>1256739360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So vuck you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So vuck you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So vuck you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899485</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>element-o.p.</author>
	<datestamp>1256753940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&quot;Stupid phackers...&quot;
<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Stupid phackers... " : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Stupid phackers..."
  :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900775</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256758920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wondered the same thing, so I googled. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishing" title="wikipedia.org">Vishing is the criminal practice of using social engineering over the telephone system</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>I do vish they'd have come up with a better name... but considering GNU, TWAIN, Windows, iPod, (and especially that abominably named "WiFi"), we as a group are pretty bad at coming up with good names.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wondered the same thing , so I googled .
Vishing is the criminal practice of using social engineering over the telephone system [ wikipedia.org ] I do vish they 'd have come up with a better name... but considering GNU , TWAIN , Windows , iPod , ( and especially that abominably named " WiFi " ) , we as a group are pretty bad at coming up with good names .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wondered the same thing, so I googled.
Vishing is the criminal practice of using social engineering over the telephone system [wikipedia.org]I do vish they'd have come up with a better name... but considering GNU, TWAIN, Windows, iPod, (and especially that abominably named "WiFi"), we as a group are pretty bad at coming up with good names.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905185</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>jsiren</author>
	<datestamp>1256739540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".</p></div><p>You might vant to throw a coin in the vishing vell.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure we could come up with a better term than " vishing " .You might vant to throw a coin in the vishing vell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".You might vant to throw a coin in the vishing vell.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898349</id>
	<title>Security!</title>
	<author>Shadyman</author>
	<datestamp>1256748960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds like some banks haven't been keeping things up to date...<br> <br>Security patches are there for a reason. Security.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like some banks have n't been keeping things up to date... Security patches are there for a reason .
Security .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like some banks haven't been keeping things up to date... Security patches are there for a reason.
Security.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898965</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>drpimp</author>
	<datestamp>1256751660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually think I got one of these calls sometime last week. The recording left a message and is still in my box, well half of it. Apparently their dialer script doesn't have that great of, if any, PAMD. The audio is what sounds like a native English speaker, speaking very fast but sometimes stumbling, likely reading from a written script asking for account numbers and ATM codes. I immediately knew it was a scam but I am sure others receiving the call might have not have been so lucky to recognize that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually think I got one of these calls sometime last week .
The recording left a message and is still in my box , well half of it .
Apparently their dialer script does n't have that great of , if any , PAMD .
The audio is what sounds like a native English speaker , speaking very fast but sometimes stumbling , likely reading from a written script asking for account numbers and ATM codes .
I immediately knew it was a scam but I am sure others receiving the call might have not have been so lucky to recognize that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually think I got one of these calls sometime last week.
The recording left a message and is still in my box, well half of it.
Apparently their dialer script doesn't have that great of, if any, PAMD.
The audio is what sounds like a native English speaker, speaking very fast but sometimes stumbling, likely reading from a written script asking for account numbers and ATM codes.
I immediately knew it was a scam but I am sure others receiving the call might have not have been so lucky to recognize that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898525</id>
	<title>Usage guide</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Vishing is pronounced "wishing," as in "I am vishing to see your nuclear vessels."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Vishing is pronounced " wishing , " as in " I am vishing to see your nuclear vessels .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vishing is pronounced "wishing," as in "I am vishing to see your nuclear vessels.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903001</id>
	<title>Re:Complete crap</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256726400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember you...you were that guy that spammed the asterisk bug tracker saying that people should switch to FreeSWITCH on about 10 different bugs.  Nice to see that some things never change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember you...you were that guy that spammed the asterisk bug tracker saying that people should switch to FreeSWITCH on about 10 different bugs .
Nice to see that some things never change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember you...you were that guy that spammed the asterisk bug tracker saying that people should switch to FreeSWITCH on about 10 different bugs.
Nice to see that some things never change.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899163</id>
	<title>undoing moderation</title>
	<author>Rashan</author>
	<datestamp>1256752500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>positing to undo incorrect moderation.

nothing to see here, move along...</htmltext>
<tokenext>positing to undo incorrect moderation .
nothing to see here , move along.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>positing to undo incorrect moderation.
nothing to see here, move along...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901005</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256759880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm so hip I cant see over my pelvis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm so hip I cant see over my pelvis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm so hip I cant see over my pelvis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898565</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900297</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Mike Buddha</author>
	<datestamp>1256757000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about calling the lot of them "dicks"? I think that pretty well sums it up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about calling the lot of them " dicks " ?
I think that pretty well sums it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about calling the lot of them "dicks"?
I think that pretty well sums it up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899125</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899775</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Carbaholic</author>
	<datestamp>1256754960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, really. Not only that but soon there will be virtual actors or vactors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , really .
Not only that but soon there will be virtual actors or vactors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, really.
Not only that but soon there will be virtual actors or vactors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902671</id>
	<title>A new name...Why ?</title>
	<author>Archfeld</author>
	<datestamp>1256724720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about thieves, frauds, con-men, or scam artists ?? I find it hard to believe this is actually a problem. Is there REALLY anyone out there STUPID enough to give up your pin ? C'mon folks the real bankers don't need it to do what they do,<b>ANYONE asking for your PIN is a thief, plain and simple.</b> If you give anyone your PIN other than your more significant half you are a fool of the worst possible kind, and likely deserve what is coming to you. Tell you parents and grandparents that there is NEVER an emergency or occasion to give up the PIN...<b>NEVER<b>.</b></b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about thieves , frauds , con-men , or scam artists ? ?
I find it hard to believe this is actually a problem .
Is there REALLY anyone out there STUPID enough to give up your pin ?
C'mon folks the real bankers do n't need it to do what they do,ANYONE asking for your PIN is a thief , plain and simple .
If you give anyone your PIN other than your more significant half you are a fool of the worst possible kind , and likely deserve what is coming to you .
Tell you parents and grandparents that there is NEVER an emergency or occasion to give up the PIN...NEVER .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about thieves, frauds, con-men, or scam artists ??
I find it hard to believe this is actually a problem.
Is there REALLY anyone out there STUPID enough to give up your pin ?
C'mon folks the real bankers don't need it to do what they do,ANYONE asking for your PIN is a thief, plain and simple.
If you give anyone your PIN other than your more significant half you are a fool of the worst possible kind, and likely deserve what is coming to you.
Tell you parents and grandparents that there is NEVER an emergency or occasion to give up the PIN...NEVER.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900187</id>
	<title>FBI doesn't care</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256756520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of my clients got hacked and was being used for a vishing attack. I called the FBI and was passed around and around because no particular office wanted the case. The client had setup SIP devices with the same name and secret and had not limited them to a specific IP range. Not a good idea.</p><p>In a more blatant case, someone purchased a toll free number 1 digit away from one that I own and was using an legitimate carrier to process incoming calls. Once again, I notified the authorities after people were misdialing the number and reaching me, and the case was too complex for them to handle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of my clients got hacked and was being used for a vishing attack .
I called the FBI and was passed around and around because no particular office wanted the case .
The client had setup SIP devices with the same name and secret and had not limited them to a specific IP range .
Not a good idea.In a more blatant case , someone purchased a toll free number 1 digit away from one that I own and was using an legitimate carrier to process incoming calls .
Once again , I notified the authorities after people were misdialing the number and reaching me , and the case was too complex for them to handle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of my clients got hacked and was being used for a vishing attack.
I called the FBI and was passed around and around because no particular office wanted the case.
The client had setup SIP devices with the same name and secret and had not limited them to a specific IP range.
Not a good idea.In a more blatant case, someone purchased a toll free number 1 digit away from one that I own and was using an legitimate carrier to process incoming calls.
Once again, I notified the authorities after people were misdialing the number and reaching me, and the case was too complex for them to handle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898435</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't always hang up. I hung up on a persistent caller and realized it was my bank confirming a charge. They then locked my account. (Strangely, I can get SMS alerts that I have more money, but not that I've spent it or that I'm low.)</p><p>Generally, if you hear connection and then a delay, you know it's either a recording or an autodialer. Both will pause to detect an answering machine / voicemail. Also, if a telemarketer is using an autodialer, it dials multiple numbers and then has to connect an operator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't always hang up .
I hung up on a persistent caller and realized it was my bank confirming a charge .
They then locked my account .
( Strangely , I can get SMS alerts that I have more money , but not that I 've spent it or that I 'm low .
) Generally , if you hear connection and then a delay , you know it 's either a recording or an autodialer .
Both will pause to detect an answering machine / voicemail .
Also , if a telemarketer is using an autodialer , it dials multiple numbers and then has to connect an operator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't always hang up.
I hung up on a persistent caller and realized it was my bank confirming a charge.
They then locked my account.
(Strangely, I can get SMS alerts that I have more money, but not that I've spent it or that I'm low.
)Generally, if you hear connection and then a delay, you know it's either a recording or an autodialer.
Both will pause to detect an answering machine / voicemail.
Also, if a telemarketer is using an autodialer, it dials multiple numbers and then has to connect an operator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898589</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>quangdog</author>
	<datestamp>1256750040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From a <a href="http://blogs.computerworld.com/you\_may\_not\_know\_vishing\_but\_in\_some\_cases\_the\_ftc\_has\_your\_back" title="computerworld.com">link</a> [computerworld.com] from TFS:
"Vishing is much like phishing, but instead of urging e-mail recipients to click on a link (to a bogus website) this message instructs the reader to call a telephone number to rectify a problem with your account."
<br> <br>
I agree - "vishing" is a stupid term.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From a link [ computerworld.com ] from TFS : " Vishing is much like phishing , but instead of urging e-mail recipients to click on a link ( to a bogus website ) this message instructs the reader to call a telephone number to rectify a problem with your account .
" I agree - " vishing " is a stupid term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a link [computerworld.com] from TFS:
"Vishing is much like phishing, but instead of urging e-mail recipients to click on a link (to a bogus website) this message instructs the reader to call a telephone number to rectify a problem with your account.
"
 
I agree - "vishing" is a stupid term.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29904975</id>
	<title>Re:Fishing, phishing, vishing, what's next?</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1256737800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just whatever you do, don't click on brain://vr.fishse.facebook.gov.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just whatever you do , do n't click on brain : //vr.fishse.facebook.gov .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just whatever you do, don't click on brain://vr.fishse.facebook.gov.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898565</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Especially since v typically indicates video, e.g. VJ and vlogging.</p><p>If "hacker" can mean "anyone who does anything remotely related to computers," I'm pretty sure we don't need "vishing" and (even worse) spear phishing.</p><p>Man, we're edgy and hip: even the kids aren't using this slang!</p><p>This stuff is almost as bad as when various drug propaganda prints out lists of terms for drugs. Because, you know, otherwise we might think X is something you get in your Flintstone's vitamins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Especially since v typically indicates video , e.g .
VJ and vlogging.If " hacker " can mean " anyone who does anything remotely related to computers , " I 'm pretty sure we do n't need " vishing " and ( even worse ) spear phishing.Man , we 're edgy and hip : even the kids are n't using this slang ! This stuff is almost as bad as when various drug propaganda prints out lists of terms for drugs .
Because , you know , otherwise we might think X is something you get in your Flintstone 's vitamins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Especially since v typically indicates video, e.g.
VJ and vlogging.If "hacker" can mean "anyone who does anything remotely related to computers," I'm pretty sure we don't need "vishing" and (even worse) spear phishing.Man, we're edgy and hip: even the kids aren't using this slang!This stuff is almost as bad as when various drug propaganda prints out lists of terms for drugs.
Because, you know, otherwise we might think X is something you get in your Flintstone's vitamins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898741</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>NotQuiteReal</author>
	<datestamp>1256750820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>What is that, voice phishing? What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"? And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?</i>
<br>
<br>
Nah, following the "vishing" substitution logic, I come up with telemarketing spammers = tammers and phreaker hackers would be phackers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is that , voice phishing ?
What 's next , we 're going to call telemarketers " vammers " ?
And we 'll call phreakers " vackers " ?
Nah , following the " vishing " substitution logic , I come up with telemarketing spammers = tammers and phreaker hackers would be phackers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is that, voice phishing?
What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?
And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?
Nah, following the "vishing" substitution logic, I come up with telemarketing spammers = tammers and phreaker hackers would be phackers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>Deanalator</author>
	<datestamp>1256750460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was getting a recorded message from a spoofed cid at 000-000-0000 and would always kill the call as I saw it come in.  Turns out it was the my gas company trying to resolve some billing issues.</p><p>A note to all "legit" businesses out there, blocked numbers and especially spoofed cids are super sketchy, don't do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was getting a recorded message from a spoofed cid at 000-000-0000 and would always kill the call as I saw it come in .
Turns out it was the my gas company trying to resolve some billing issues.A note to all " legit " businesses out there , blocked numbers and especially spoofed cids are super sketchy , do n't do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was getting a recorded message from a spoofed cid at 000-000-0000 and would always kill the call as I saw it come in.
Turns out it was the my gas company trying to resolve some billing issues.A note to all "legit" businesses out there, blocked numbers and especially spoofed cids are super sketchy, don't do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898853</id>
	<title>Lock Down Your Phones, People!</title>
	<author>mercutioviz</author>
	<datestamp>1256751180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, it's lock down your phones, your VM systems, your IVRs, etc. etc. Many years ago I had someone guess a password on a VM system and I had forgotten to disable "external transfers"... oops. Toll fraud. Now I use safe telecom practices. Practice number 1: Use FreeSWITCH instead of anything else. While any system can be configured unsafely and insecurely, at least the initial FreeSWITCH config is "paranoid by default."
-MC</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's lock down your phones , your VM systems , your IVRs , etc .
etc. Many years ago I had someone guess a password on a VM system and I had forgotten to disable " external transfers " ... oops. Toll fraud .
Now I use safe telecom practices .
Practice number 1 : Use FreeSWITCH instead of anything else .
While any system can be configured unsafely and insecurely , at least the initial FreeSWITCH config is " paranoid by default .
" -MC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's lock down your phones, your VM systems, your IVRs, etc.
etc. Many years ago I had someone guess a password on a VM system and I had forgotten to disable "external transfers"... oops. Toll fraud.
Now I use safe telecom practices.
Practice number 1: Use FreeSWITCH instead of anything else.
While any system can be configured unsafely and insecurely, at least the initial FreeSWITCH config is "paranoid by default.
"
-MC</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903587</id>
	<title>Vunerabilities are the nature of appliances</title>
	<author>thatkid\_2002</author>
	<datestamp>1256729280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think part of the reason this vulnerability still exists in the wild is because of the appliance style deployment of Asterisk implementations. I believe the term is "Once you have MythTV set up DO NOT FIDDLE WITH IT!!!". Oops, I meant Asterisk not MythTV. Same difference.

Not fiddling often involves not updating.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think part of the reason this vulnerability still exists in the wild is because of the appliance style deployment of Asterisk implementations .
I believe the term is " Once you have MythTV set up DO NOT FIDDLE WITH IT ! ! ! " .
Oops , I meant Asterisk not MythTV .
Same difference .
Not fiddling often involves not updating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think part of the reason this vulnerability still exists in the wild is because of the appliance style deployment of Asterisk implementations.
I believe the term is "Once you have MythTV set up DO NOT FIDDLE WITH IT!!!".
Oops, I meant Asterisk not MythTV.
Same difference.
Not fiddling often involves not updating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29922727</id>
	<title>Re:Complete crap</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256911800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>asterisk need a SBC?<br>so bad,;<br>freeswitch is both a PBX/Softswitch/SBC/... and auto protected</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>asterisk need a SBC ? so bad , ; freeswitch is both a PBX/Softswitch/SBC/... and auto protected</tokentext>
<sentencetext>asterisk need a SBC?so bad,;freeswitch is both a PBX/Softswitch/SBC/... and auto protected</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899553</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>phoenixwade</author>
	<datestamp>1256754180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>those Phreaking Vishers........</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>those Phreaking Vishers....... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>those Phreaking Vishers........</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898321</id>
	<title>Asterix</title>
	<author>lamadude</author>
	<datestamp>1256748840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Asterix was fishing when he was attacked by the Romans again? Where was Obelix? He'll win in the end, he always does.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Asterix was fishing when he was attacked by the Romans again ?
Where was Obelix ?
He 'll win in the end , he always does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asterix was fishing when he was attacked by the Romans again?
Where was Obelix?
He'll win in the end, he always does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900097</id>
	<title>Just use FreeSWITCH instead of Asterisk</title>
	<author>diego.viola</author>
	<datestamp>1256756160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why someone would still use Asterisk is beyond me, just use FreeSWITCH, it's a much better alternative.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why someone would still use Asterisk is beyond me , just use FreeSWITCH , it 's a much better alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why someone would still use Asterisk is beyond me, just use FreeSWITCH, it's a much better alternative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900163</id>
	<title>Answering the question in your .sig</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256756400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Please post the stock symbol of a highly profitable healthcare insurance company. I want to invest but can't find one.</p></div></blockquote><p>All of them are highly profitable, even after all the paper shuffling, congressional payola, and obscene executive compensation and bonuses.</p><p>I recommend MetLife, MET, 3.2 billion in profits this year and rising, number 39 in the Fortune 500, and rising.</p><p>Some people prefer UNH, the largest of the whales, number 21 in the 500 and rising, but they only saw 2.9 billion in profits once they'd paid for all the cheesesteaks and blowjobs for the executive officers.</p><p>If you want to make some real money you want to invest in gigantic drug companies, though - they are the only ones with a chance of knocking the telcos and oil magnates off their bloody thrones.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please post the stock symbol of a highly profitable healthcare insurance company .
I want to invest but ca n't find one.All of them are highly profitable , even after all the paper shuffling , congressional payola , and obscene executive compensation and bonuses.I recommend MetLife , MET , 3.2 billion in profits this year and rising , number 39 in the Fortune 500 , and rising.Some people prefer UNH , the largest of the whales , number 21 in the 500 and rising , but they only saw 2.9 billion in profits once they 'd paid for all the cheesesteaks and blowjobs for the executive officers.If you want to make some real money you want to invest in gigantic drug companies , though - they are the only ones with a chance of knocking the telcos and oil magnates off their bloody thrones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please post the stock symbol of a highly profitable healthcare insurance company.
I want to invest but can't find one.All of them are highly profitable, even after all the paper shuffling, congressional payola, and obscene executive compensation and bonuses.I recommend MetLife, MET, 3.2 billion in profits this year and rising, number 39 in the Fortune 500, and rising.Some people prefer UNH, the largest of the whales, number 21 in the 500 and rising, but they only saw 2.9 billion in profits once they'd paid for all the cheesesteaks and blowjobs for the executive officers.If you want to make some real money you want to invest in gigantic drug companies, though - they are the only ones with a chance of knocking the telcos and oil magnates off their bloody thrones.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901581</id>
	<title>Language Problems?</title>
	<author>ndunnuck</author>
	<datestamp>1256762520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means."

I'm not entirely sure anyone here knows what "endemic" means.  "Endemic" is not newsworthy, unless we've been searching and searching for where these vishing attacks come from.  "Pandemic" might be newsworthy.  Or "epidemic" might be newsworthy.  "Endemic" not so much.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" You keep using that word .
I do not think it means what you think it means .
" I 'm not entirely sure anyone here knows what " endemic " means .
" Endemic " is not newsworthy , unless we 've been searching and searching for where these vishing attacks come from .
" Pandemic " might be newsworthy .
Or " epidemic " might be newsworthy .
" Endemic " not so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
"

I'm not entirely sure anyone here knows what "endemic" means.
"Endemic" is not newsworthy, unless we've been searching and searching for where these vishing attacks come from.
"Pandemic" might be newsworthy.
Or "epidemic" might be newsworthy.
"Endemic" not so much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902277</id>
	<title>Re:Complete crap</title>
	<author>rantingkitten</author>
	<datestamp>1256722620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most of the security problems I've seen actually exploited are not a problem with asterisk as such, or even border control, but of retarded admins.  For example, many IP phones expect to connect to a fileserver of some sort and download some xml files containing their SIP information.  Admins will routinely just create an ftp account somewhere, using the default login and password of the phones, and dump the files there.  They'll frequently allow that ftp user to have shell access too, or forget to disable directory listing on the ftp directory, or do anything else that resembles common sense and security.  <br>
<br>
It would be trivial to portscan far and wide, find some asterisk boxes, and exploit these terribly common mistakes made by clueless admins.  I have demonstrated to clients how I was able to log into their server armed only with the knowledge of what the default ftp username and password is, then download all their users' config files containing all the information I'd need to fraudulently use their phone lines.  Sometimes it takes a dramatic demonstration like that to make people wake up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the security problems I 've seen actually exploited are not a problem with asterisk as such , or even border control , but of retarded admins .
For example , many IP phones expect to connect to a fileserver of some sort and download some xml files containing their SIP information .
Admins will routinely just create an ftp account somewhere , using the default login and password of the phones , and dump the files there .
They 'll frequently allow that ftp user to have shell access too , or forget to disable directory listing on the ftp directory , or do anything else that resembles common sense and security .
It would be trivial to portscan far and wide , find some asterisk boxes , and exploit these terribly common mistakes made by clueless admins .
I have demonstrated to clients how I was able to log into their server armed only with the knowledge of what the default ftp username and password is , then download all their users ' config files containing all the information I 'd need to fraudulently use their phone lines .
Sometimes it takes a dramatic demonstration like that to make people wake up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the security problems I've seen actually exploited are not a problem with asterisk as such, or even border control, but of retarded admins.
For example, many IP phones expect to connect to a fileserver of some sort and download some xml files containing their SIP information.
Admins will routinely just create an ftp account somewhere, using the default login and password of the phones, and dump the files there.
They'll frequently allow that ftp user to have shell access too, or forget to disable directory listing on the ftp directory, or do anything else that resembles common sense and security.
It would be trivial to portscan far and wide, find some asterisk boxes, and exploit these terribly common mistakes made by clueless admins.
I have demonstrated to clients how I was able to log into their server armed only with the knowledge of what the default ftp username and password is, then download all their users' config files containing all the information I'd need to fraudulently use their phone lines.
Sometimes it takes a dramatic demonstration like that to make people wake up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898335</id>
	<title>Vishing</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1256748900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Vishing is the criminal practice of using social engineering over the telephone system, most often using features facilitated by Voice over IP (VoIP)</p></div></blockquote><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishing" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishing</a> [wikipedia.org] <br> <br>
Either that or it's an old world ethnic pronunciation of the word "wishing".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vishing is the criminal practice of using social engineering over the telephone system , most often using features facilitated by Voice over IP ( VoIP ) http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishing [ wikipedia.org ] Either that or it 's an old world ethnic pronunciation of the word " wishing " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vishing is the criminal practice of using social engineering over the telephone system, most often using features facilitated by Voice over IP (VoIP) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishing [wikipedia.org]  
Either that or it's an old world ethnic pronunciation of the word "wishing".
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898623</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>jittles</author>
	<datestamp>1256750160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, the attack is named after my Indian friend Vishal.  But everyone calls him Vish.

No really, I didn't just make this up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the attack is named after my Indian friend Vishal .
But everyone calls him Vish .
No really , I did n't just make this up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the attack is named after my Indian friend Vishal.
But everyone calls him Vish.
No really, I didn't just make this up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29906385</id>
	<title>Re:Complete crap</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. Asterisk is complete crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Asterisk is complete crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Asterisk is complete crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899819</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>secretcurse</author>
	<datestamp>1256755140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When my credit card company detects a charge that might be fraud, they send a robo call telling me to call the number on the back of my card to discuss a possible fraud issue.  I like that a lot better than having someone I can't verify call me and ask for personal information.  When I call the number printed on my card I can be reasonably certain that I know which company is going to be on the other end of the line.  If an attack is so advanced that a thief knows the number printed on the back of my card and has the means to intercept me when I dial that number there's probably nothing that can stop it.  That's why I monitor my card statements online.  You can't be liable for fraud you report in a timely manner.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When my credit card company detects a charge that might be fraud , they send a robo call telling me to call the number on the back of my card to discuss a possible fraud issue .
I like that a lot better than having someone I ca n't verify call me and ask for personal information .
When I call the number printed on my card I can be reasonably certain that I know which company is going to be on the other end of the line .
If an attack is so advanced that a thief knows the number printed on the back of my card and has the means to intercept me when I dial that number there 's probably nothing that can stop it .
That 's why I monitor my card statements online .
You ca n't be liable for fraud you report in a timely manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When my credit card company detects a charge that might be fraud, they send a robo call telling me to call the number on the back of my card to discuss a possible fraud issue.
I like that a lot better than having someone I can't verify call me and ask for personal information.
When I call the number printed on my card I can be reasonably certain that I know which company is going to be on the other end of the line.
If an attack is so advanced that a thief knows the number printed on the back of my card and has the means to intercept me when I dial that number there's probably nothing that can stop it.
That's why I monitor my card statements online.
You can't be liable for fraud you report in a timely manner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29910319</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256831160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My wife managed to screw us over with something similar.  She kept getting calls from an unknown number on her cell phone, which she would just ignore.  So then they would leave voicemails saying that we were past due on our Target credit card.  But, of course, using an Indian customer service company with incredibly poor phone service, so all she could make out was something about our Target card.  She figured it was some kind of scam.</p><p>After SEVERAL months of this she got a call while I was around, and hung up as usual.  I suggest, "hey, maybe we should check on our card, since you've been getting calls about it?"  Sure enough it was now months past due, with numerous "late fees" and etc. tacked on.</p><p>*grrrrrr*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife managed to screw us over with something similar .
She kept getting calls from an unknown number on her cell phone , which she would just ignore .
So then they would leave voicemails saying that we were past due on our Target credit card .
But , of course , using an Indian customer service company with incredibly poor phone service , so all she could make out was something about our Target card .
She figured it was some kind of scam.After SEVERAL months of this she got a call while I was around , and hung up as usual .
I suggest , " hey , maybe we should check on our card , since you 've been getting calls about it ?
" Sure enough it was now months past due , with numerous " late fees " and etc .
tacked on .
* grrrrrr *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife managed to screw us over with something similar.
She kept getting calls from an unknown number on her cell phone, which she would just ignore.
So then they would leave voicemails saying that we were past due on our Target credit card.
But, of course, using an Indian customer service company with incredibly poor phone service, so all she could make out was something about our Target card.
She figured it was some kind of scam.After SEVERAL months of this she got a call while I was around, and hung up as usual.
I suggest, "hey, maybe we should check on our card, since you've been getting calls about it?
"  Sure enough it was now months past due, with numerous "late fees" and etc.
tacked on.
*grrrrrr*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</id>
	<title>Vishing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256748360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Vishing?  Really?<br> <br>What is that, voice phishing?  What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?  And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?<br> <br>I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vishing ?
Really ? What is that , voice phishing ?
What 's next , we 're going to call telemarketers " vammers " ?
And we 'll call phreakers " vackers " ?
I 'm sure we could come up with a better term than " vishing " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Vishing?
Really? What is that, voice phishing?
What's next, we're going to call telemarketers "vammers"?
And we'll call phreakers "vackers"?
I'm sure we could come up with a better term than "vishing".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29904789</id>
	<title>Re:\_All\_ prerecorded calls are spam.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256736720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, did you give your "gas company" your credit card number in order to resolve this so called billing issue?</p><p>Just saying...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , did you give your " gas company " your credit card number in order to resolve this so called billing issue ? Just saying.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, did you give your "gas company" your credit card number in order to resolve this so called billing issue?Just saying...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419</id>
	<title>Moral of the story</title>
	<author>Random2</author>
	<datestamp>1256749260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't give sensitive information away unless in person.  If you bank says there's something wrong with your account, either call them via their listed phone number or go visit them in person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't give sensitive information away unless in person .
If you bank says there 's something wrong with your account , either call them via their listed phone number or go visit them in person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't give sensitive information away unless in person.
If you bank says there's something wrong with your account, either call them via their listed phone number or go visit them in person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898333</id>
	<title>Re:Vishing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256748900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ooh! Something with avian implications seems appropriate, since everyone who's anyone has a cat, and unlike fish, birds have voices. Songbirding, bird poaching... voaching?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ooh !
Something with avian implications seems appropriate , since everyone who 's anyone has a cat , and unlike fish , birds have voices .
Songbirding , bird poaching... voaching ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ooh!
Something with avian implications seems appropriate, since everyone who's anyone has a cat, and unlike fish, birds have voices.
Songbirding, bird poaching... voaching?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903411</id>
	<title>Re:Complete crap</title>
	<author>mercutioviz</author>
	<datestamp>1256728380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Kasparov,
<br> <br>
My apologies for Diego. While we appreciate his enthusiasm we (the FreeSWITCH community) abhor his behavior online. It is not condoned by the FS devs who've had to chastise him multiple times. Please ignore him when he goes off like that.
<br> <br>
-MC</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kasparov , My apologies for Diego .
While we appreciate his enthusiasm we ( the FreeSWITCH community ) abhor his behavior online .
It is not condoned by the FS devs who 've had to chastise him multiple times .
Please ignore him when he goes off like that .
-MC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kasparov,
 
My apologies for Diego.
While we appreciate his enthusiasm we (the FreeSWITCH community) abhor his behavior online.
It is not condoned by the FS devs who've had to chastise him multiple times.
Please ignore him when he goes off like that.
-MC</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899003</id>
	<title>Re:Moral of the story</title>
	<author>Bryansix</author>
	<datestamp>1256751840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly! The same tactic that defeats Phishing emails also works for Vishing or any other type of social engineering in the direction of the company to the consumer. It however doesn't fix the problem of when the customer (or someone pretending to be them) calls the company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly !
The same tactic that defeats Phishing emails also works for Vishing or any other type of social engineering in the direction of the company to the consumer .
It however does n't fix the problem of when the customer ( or someone pretending to be them ) calls the company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly!
The same tactic that defeats Phishing emails also works for Vishing or any other type of social engineering in the direction of the company to the consumer.
It however doesn't fix the problem of when the customer (or someone pretending to be them) calls the company.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902671
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898435
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899819
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29908353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903411
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900687
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29904789
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29922727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899779
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899465
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899315
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898651
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898331
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29906385
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899125
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29910319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29904975
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1510200_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902277
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905401
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898321
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898525
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898651
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899315
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901581
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900097
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898225
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899819
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898677
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29910319
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29904789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899607
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899125
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898565
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29901005
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29905185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898741
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900163
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898335
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900187
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902277
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29906385
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29899931
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903001
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903411
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29922727
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29904975
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900705
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29900687
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29902581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29908353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29903519
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1510200.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1510200.29898349
</commentlist>
</conversation>
